Carroll v. Xerox Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that it is insufficient to merely submit evidence of medical diagnosis without evidence that extent of limitation caused by impairment in terms of plaintiffs own experience is substantial
• explaining that a complaint will withstand a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss if it “alleges facts sufficient to make out a cognizable claim”
• stating that a reasonable accommodation claim consisted of the first two elements of a disparate treatment claim plus a distinct third element
• explaining that one way to prove disability is to demonstrate a mental or physical impairment that substantially limits one or more of plaintiff’s major life activities
• concluding plaintiff did not establish stress as a disability because it did not significantly restrict employee from working altogether, rather just his particular position at a particular period in time
• explaining that the ADA’s “disability requirement can be satisfied by demonstrating a physical or mental impairment that substantially limited one or more of [the plaintiff’s] major life activities” (citing 42 U.S.C. § 12102(2)(A))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).